Pleading "Ignorance" NO Defense

Interesting that it is presumed employees responsibility now working from home, shifting liability for repetitive stress injuries and occupational health practice onto the DSE operator regardless, of employers failing in their duty of care exhibited in presenteeism in the workplace and/or regular ineffective Safety Alerts being issued since the HSE Better Display Screen RR 561 2007 highlighting the ineffectiveness of the 1993 UK DSE Regulations.

Luckily, up until now, employers could rely on UK employees not to be litigious, as their cousin’s across the water who are now taking the opportunity, out of the office, to make their ADA claims in sufficient numbers to classify as a “class action” against their employers – plural.

https://www.ediscoverylawalert.com/2020/04/01/ada-website-liability-and-covid-19/

With 58% of DSE operators suffering presenteeism due to over-exposure to sub-optimal AND unmitigated screen ergonomics, not only impairing “accessibility” by an average 20% but, significantly increasing the risks of RSI’s, visual and physical, expediently dismissed by HSE and Union’s for a decade plus, I for one, am not sure whether the international nature of the 2018 BSI ISO 45001 Occupation Health Standards “Work Exposure Limits” nor WCAG 2.1, Human Rights or 2010 UK Equality Act let the “retrospective” president in 2011 Baker v Quantum Clothing & Ors can be expediently ignored for too much longer ?

The questions were being asked back in 2012 roughly the same time as the New EU MSD Directive didn’t launch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws5IuBFSnUE

https://www.shponline.co.uk/lone-working/home-working-for-young-workers/?elq_mid=3529&elq_cid=247823?